Evaluation of the Rheologic and Physicochemical Properties of a Novel Hyaluronic Acid Filler Range with eXcellent Three-Dimensional Reticulation (XTR™) Technology

Abstract

Soft-tissue fillers made of hyaluronic acid and combined with lidocaine have recently become a popular tool in aesthetic medicine. Several manufacturers have developed their own proprietary formulae with varying manufacturing tools, concentrations, crosslinked three-dimensional network structures, pore size distributions of the fibrous networks, as well as cohesivity levels and rheological properties, lending fillers and filler ranges their unique properties and degradability profiles. One such range of hyaluronic acid fillers manufactured using the novel eXcellent three-dimensional reticulation (XTR™) technology was evaluated in comparison with other HA fillers and filler ranges by an independent research laboratory. Fillers manufactured with the XTR™ technology were shown to have characteristic rheological, crosslinking and biophysical factors that support the suitability of this filler range for certain patient profiles.

Midface 3D restoration with an innovative high G’ filler

“…Moreover, this kind of techniques are preferred in respect to surgical procedures as they are capable of producing the same corrections without the concerning of a surgery. A new monophasic hyaluronic acid (HA) filler, with high G’ and medium cohesivity, based on a new exclusive technology (XTR™—eXcellent Tridimensional Reticulation technology), thanks to its particular properties is able to lift cheeks, increase skin volume in the critical aging areas, and skin quality with long‐lasting effects 10 …”

“…The HA fillers manufactured with XTR TM technology present high elasticity, homogeneity, stability, and resistance to deformation, long-lasting effects, great tissue support, and volumizing capacity in respect to other fillers available in the market. 10 These properties are associated with high G' and medium cohesivity filler that have good volume restoration and tissue integration. 11 This study aims to evaluate the XTR™ technology efficacy in the rejuvenation processes by reestablishing the facial volume and the skin quality, contributing to an optimal aesthetic outcome and thus, improving the self-esteem of patients.…”

“…The lately introduced eXcellent Three‐dimensional Reticulation (XTR TM ) technology of Definisse TM Filler has proved to be a great option for face rejuvenation. The HA fillers manufactured with XTR TM technology present high elasticity, homogeneity, stability, and resistance to deformation, long‐lasting effects, great tissue support, and volumizing capacity in respect to other fillers available in the market 10 . These properties are associated with high G’ and medium cohesivity filler that have good volume restoration and tissue integration 11 …”

Comparative Analyses of Inflammatory Response and Tissue Integration of 14 Hyaluronic Acid-Based Fillers in Mini Pigs

“…In contrast, the lower cohesivity and higher viscoelastic properties of the bi-phasic filler (RES series) may be attributed to its pooling characteristics. 45 , 46 Rheological data from several other studies have demonstrated that biphasic HA gels generally have higher elastic (G′) and viscous (G″) modulus than monophasic HA gels ( Table 3 ). These findings suggest that the differences in tissue integration across various HA fillers may be due to the variability in cohesivity and viscoelasticity of each filler.…”

“…44 Mono-phasic fillers have been reported to show higher cohesivity (ie, higher affinity between the gel molecules) and lower viscoelasticity than bi-phasic fillers. 44 , 45 This combination of features likely allowed mono-phasic fillers (NEU series and BEL-VL) to easily occupy the small spaces between the tissue fibers while maintaining their original shape for a more homogeneous distribution. In contrast, the lower cohesivity and higher viscoelastic properties of the bi-phasic filler (RES series) may be attributed to its pooling characteristics.…”